Powderscales on Benchrest range?

Wayne Shaw said:
I guess I'll have to look into those glass vials for the 2 relay matches.
Click to expand...

Wayne, instead of using glass vials and having to fool with dumping them into the cases, why not dump, weigh, and pour into your cases, then short seat the bullets? At the match simply seat the bullets to the desired depth. I have found that adjusting seating depth by as little as 0.003" many times has more effect on group size than a couple of clicks of the measure.

Sure, this requires more prepared cases initially, you're going prepare those cases eventually so do it now!! Its going to snow all weekend anyhoo!!

Get 20 MTM RS-S-50 boxes and put 12 or 15 prepped cases in each. Then at the match, open a box, reseat the bullets and go. Put a reference number or letter on each box to keep a record of each prepared lot and how it preformed.
 
A number of years ago, George Kelbly shot a match at the Visalia range, that I had come by to visit as a spectator. During that visit, I was lucky enough to get to spend some time discussing several Benchrest related topic with him. One was cleaning. It was his opinion that many Benchrest competitors tend to clean more often than is needed, and that cleaning every second or third group (depending on the number of sighters used) would work as well. After that, I began doing exactly as he recommended, and paying attention, to see if I could detect any deterioration of accuracy of the second or third group after cleaning. I did not. In fact, I found the opposite to be the case. This has allowed me to alternate cleaning and loading between matches. I suppose that I should add that my primary experience has been with 133. As far as two relay matches go, I believe that the rules specify a minimum time between matches for any given relay...30 minutes I believe, but it has a while since I looked.
 
Follow up

Bullen said:
That's probably right ;-)
But if I want to do everything I can to be accurate in my reloading, why not test some electronic scale.

"Centerfire": I have read about Dillons D-terminator electronic scale, it seems to be a good alternative?
Simple, flexible and easy to carry but maybee not the most accurate... in comparision to scales like Adam HCB 0,01.
I'm sure it's better with 0,1 grains accuracy than my throwing up and down.

I can guess that the more accurate and expensive scales will take more time to finish weigh and : more sensitive in winds

I grateful for more opinions and advice....
Maybee experience from electronic scales on loading bench.
Thanks

Ps.sry for not so good English but I'm learning :)
Click to expand...

Bullen, I have been using the Dillon Determinator at matches for 5 years now shooting N-133. Yes, the scale will drift but they all do. I use the batteries as I feel the scale does not drift as much. I just recalibrate when I need to. I decided to get the Adam to see how accurate the Dillon was and only use it in my basement.
I weigh every round and chrono every shot and determined that the Dillon was as consistent as it needs to be at 0.1grs. And the more I read here using a Harrel powder thrower can be just as accurate.
If you have a Harrels drop 10 charges in a glass and measure the weight.
Do this ten times. If you have a smooth technique you will see that your totals will be to the tenth and the variation will be in the 0.xx (hundreths)
Try running 8 lbs through your measure and see how well you do.
Centerfire
 
Ok Centerfire
It seems that the Dillon D can be the answer to my question.... I think that Adam HCB is a little overkill for me.
I presume that Adam scale isn't the most smooth/quickest way to load on the range. Also very wind-sensitive?

As I'm not so good in throwing consistent with my Harrel measure yet... think I will get hold of one Dillon.

I have throwed at least 4 lbs before loading 3000 rounds this year.. still not satisfied.. also have problem with :many grain of powder are getting stuck. (I'm not sure that stuck is the right word.. but "get caught" when throwing)
In swedish = Hackar fast :)
After 20 drops the variation is 0.3 - 0,4 g.

Maybee nothing compared to other important things as... reading winds, bench technique and tuning etc.... but why not be accurate with everything..

Thanks all of you for taking part in this interesting thread.
Benchrest shooters are generous and helpful people.
 
I just had to bring this thread back to the top.

This morning I spent a about 4 hours in Dad's basement throwing powder with my "Harrell’s Premium BR Powder Measure" (read Hummer measure) which is set up for 6 divisions between numbered values.

I concentrated my throwing with 3 powders, V V 133 (for my PPC's), H 4198 (for my .30 BR's), and IMR 8208 xbr (which I use in my 6.5mm BR)

Scales: I have an old O’hause (made for RCBS) Balance beem scale, And I have a Pact digital. A number of Years ago, before Greg Walley was working for Kelblys, he made me a set of weights on a Laboratory scale the weights are accurate to .001 grains. One weight is 27.903 grains, and the other is 28.003 grains. When I test either one of these scales with these weights the scales are right on. Neither have ever varied. I know you guys talk about the digital readout or resolution of the digital scales as being accurate to + or - .1 grains, I fully understand that, but if the scale, or scale DRO (digital readout) were to vary, wouldn't it vary while using the test weights as well as a charge? Think about that. The reason Greg made these weights at that range was that at the time we were shooting mostly 6 ppc and .220 Russian, to test the scale at 50 or 20 Grams makes no sense, if what you are weighing is only 28 grains.

Now to the powder throwing: I already said I tested three powders. I tested each of them the same way. I start by setting up the measure with the powder in it and running about ten charges through the measure. This clears the tightly compacted charge from the bottom of the measure from the initial filling. Those ten charges I just dump back into the hole at the top of the bottle. I throw my charges into a small prescription bottle so I don't lose granules out the side. Once the initial dumping is done I am ready to test some charges. I begin by looking at my book and see the range of loads I use. For Instance with the H 4198 I use from 34.0 to 34.5 grains regularly, depending on conditions at the range. With my measure, a setting of 63-2 is as close as I get to 34.0, 63-3 would be heavy by a tad. So I throw 10 charges in the pill bottle and weigh it. Result was 339.4 grains an average of 33.94 grains per throw. Hold On now I know you guys are going to say my heavy charges and light charges balance out and I get to that figure basically by a guess at best. And I can see where you come from there. So I do the same thing 4 more times, lets see how repetitive that guess is. The next for 10 charges averages were 339.3 (33.93), 339.7 (33.97) 339.2 (33.92), and 339.5 (33.95). Still averaging 33.94 after 50 throws. I do this for each click up until I get to the 34.5 grain charge that my max load is set at. 63-3 averaged 34.06, 63-4 averaged 34.20, 63-5 averaged 34.35, and the top load 64-0 averaged 34.48. Just averages so far though.

Let's see what we get when we weight every charge. Of the three Powders, H4198 was the worst one with charge to charge variation. The best was IMR 8208 xbr. And Vhit 133 was in the middle of the road. When I weighed individual charges of H 4198 I weighed 20 charges at the top load (64-0) and 20 at my bottom load (63-2). The top load produced 13 charges at 34.5 (the scale rounds my average 34.48 to 34.5), and 5 charges at 34.4, with the other 2 charges 34.6. That's + or - 0.1 grains, with the vast majority being at the charge I was set for. That was the worst powder I measured and it is used in my .30 BR for Score (Ron Hoehn claims score is entry level BR) + or - 0.1 grain is good enough for entry level, I guess! I had very similar results at my low setting of 63-2, 14 charges were at 33.9 (remember the scale will round down for 33.94), I had 4 charges at 34.0, and 2 charges at 33.8. Again + or - 0.1 grains from the amount I had set for.

The Best Powder was IMR 8208 xbr. My higher setting of 62-3 produces averages at 35.32 grains 8208 (which is used in my 6.5mm BR). That setting had 20 thrown charges 17 of which were at 35.3. And 3 of which were at 35.4, no charges were light. + 0.1 grain - 0.0 grain pretty tight. You can feel a heavy charge, because you get a harder cut on the powder, with that in mind, in the competitive arena, you could take a hard cut charge and put it back in the bottle, 3 times out of 20 isn’t bad. The lower charge of 61-5 produced charge weights that averaged 34.8 grains. Of the 20 loads thrown, 16 were on the money at 34.8, 3 were over at 34.9, and 1 was light at 34.7. Again the heavy charges you could feel the heavier cut.

I won’t go into the drama with the Vhit 133, it was better than H4198, but not as good as the 8208 xbr.

If I had a better scale you would probably still see the same results just to one more decimal point. Accuracy of + or - 0.1 grains at a 34 grain charge represents a difference in volume of 3/340ths volume required or just less than one tenth of one percent total volume variation. As good as one needs to shoot short range BR and be competitive. There are many better things to do with four hours time on a Saturday than to worry about how accurate you can throw charges, unless you need the practice. If I had the 4 hours back, I would have liked to turn necks on more brass, or better yet, practice reading the wind.

Paul
 
the probelem is your scale is only plus or minus 0.1........you cannot weigh better than that....no such thing as averaging 10.......every charge is plus or minus .1....every one!
a 34.4 maybe a 34.3 or a 34.5 and a 34.6 can be a 34.5 or a 34.7........now you have a .4 spread....
dont try this type of "test" unless you have a scale with .0x something accuracy and sensitivity...
std 0.1 beam scales have poor sensitivity...

mike in co
 
Mike you to go back and read the test...

pay particular attention to the test weights section and the fact that the test weight are at or near the weight we are testing and that at no time with the test weight did the scale very .1. It was always right on. Why would a scale that never veries with test weights at the test range decide to very when testing poder... It does not know what you put in the pan.

Paul
 
because of the design of the scale.........plain and simple.....they are plus or minus 0.1...every time.....if they were better than that, the manufacture would claim it and sell more at a higher price.....
you may know what the test weight weighs, but not the powder..it is plus or minus 0.1 every time...........still a 0.4 spread from your results with your scale..............do it all over with a lab scale..and i'll listen....until then math is math.......
mike in co
 
When I throw powder the readings I get on the scale are for instance,

34.4 34.5 34.6

The true measurements could be as high or as low as,

34.3 to 34.7 or +.2 -.2

With a known test weight I get zero variance in the scale’s readout.

When I get a hard cut charge it is .1 high, if I pour that charge back in, I can reduce my variance to 34.4 and 34.5 thrown and weighed. The range of measurements with resolution error would then be 34.3 to 34.6 or +.1 -.2 from the target 34.5.

I am willing to accept that. What I am trying to explain is that if you take the time to practice with your measure you can throw accurate charges that are “good enough” for Short range BR.

Mike, I wish I had a bigger house, especially one with more wall space… not for a better scale. But for all the trophies I’ve picked up throwing insufficient charges with my Harrell’s powder measure. The truth is I have stacks of trophies that I don’t have wall space for. I am just a nobody as far as the big shooters go. How many stacks do they have? I don’t know how much wall space many of the other guys have that throw insufficient charges with Jones’, Lyman/Culver’s, Harrell’s, or Dodd’s measures. I do know that over the years I have been beaten regularly by guys throwing crappy charges.

Maybe instead of worrying about their powder measure or scale resolution they were at the range practicing reading the wind?

Paul
 
paul..i agree there is no substitute for quality range time/actual shooting in comp.......
having said that..i believe...my opinion, is that as things have gotten better in quality...scales and powder throwers have not....it is time to look forward, not at yesterday..

mike in co
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top